[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150722214000.GP21967@google.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 16:40:00 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To: Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] PCI: iproc: enable arm64 support for iProc PCIe
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 02:09:24PM -0700, Ray Jui wrote:
> I'm fine with the entire change. Both of us understand it's temporary
> and will be removed as soon as struct pci_sys_data is removed from ARM32.
>
> Note I don't know how the code merge should work here. The iProc PCIe
> driver is enabled when CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC is enabled. Note patch #3
> of this series enables CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_IPROC for arm64. Without this
> patch, arm64 build will be broken because of struct pci_sys_data.
>
> I know you are taking PCI changes and I assume Catalin will be merging
> arm64 related changes. But patches in this patch series need to go
> together to keep things intact.
The easiest thing to do would be to merge them all through one tree.
Catalin could ack the arm64 config changes and I could merge everything via
PCI, or I could ack the PCI changes and he could merge them.
I propose the former since the PCI changes are more substantive, but if the
latter works better, feel free to add my:
Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
to the revised first patch and the second one.
Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists